UAD’s EMT Plate is Basically Magic; Watch Videos Explain

Say what you want about what’s real or what’s authentic. The beauty of digital sometimes is that it lets us do things that would otherwise be impossible – or at least far out of our reach.

I don’t know about you, but I certainly can’t my hands on an EMT 140 plate reverb. Practical, though, it ain’t: sure, you can covet “analog” gear, but this thing is a physical plate reverberation that’s the size of a car. You know “room” reverbs? This is a reverb that’s the size of a room. It weight 600 pounds. (Not figuratively. I mean it literally weighs over 270 kilos.) Flash back in time to 1957 Germany, and this monster was actually the convenient, compact size – presumably much as our grandchildren will someday laugh that we don’t snort the latest iPhone up our noses.

First, let’s look at the historical model:

Wall to Wall recordings has a stunning look at the original, explaining how it works:

Dan Dietrich (Andrew Bird,Neko Case), Head Engineer at Wall to Wall Recording in Chicago walks us through how the EMT 140 plate reverb works and operated. Topics covered aux sends,how the reverb time is adjusted and the amplification of the signal back to the control room. We get an inside look at one the all-time classic studio effects in existence.

This being the Internet, of course there’s a dedicated site showing the history of the EMTs alongside tips on tuning, cleaning, and even shipping these beasts:Dan Alexander Audio: EMT Information

Elizabeth McClanahan, who is Assistant Mixer at Heard City, has written a great overview history of the device, and its two best-known emulations – Universal Audio and Audio Ease – for Designing Sound.EMT 140 Plate Reverb

The EMT will help you realize your dream to build an army of evil killer saxophonist clones.

Into Software

Elizabeth is one of a number of people who knows far more about mixing than I do – see also Universal’s glowing reviews from the likes of mastering legend Emily Lazar and Grammy winners Paul Blakemore, engineer, and Buddy Miller, artist/producer.

Now, you can learn from the techniques of people like that and apply it to your work. But I enjoy that the sheer convenience of something like the UA and Audio Ease rendition of the EMT in software open it up to creative use and abuse. You don’t need to be accomplished enough to afford studio time and a great mastering engineer. You might just start messing with this thing on places where it shouldn’t go, or on parts that were generated by machines and software. You can, in short, be someone like me (or, maybe you). And I think that’s beautiful: it opens up a signal chain into ehis classic from a source that would never have met it before.

I use the EMT 140 on the Universal Audio platform – the Apollo Twin on the go and live and the rack-mount Apollo in the studio (with Benjamin Weiss/Nerk). And it is insanely addictive. I could whip up some demos, but basically listen to almost anything I’ve done lately and odds are you might here it – certainly on our Nerk/Kirn record for Snork Enterprises, which just hit vinyl.

That is to say, speaking as someone living in experimental electronic and techno contexts, this isn’t just limited to bands.

I’ve used the Universal Audio rendition. It’s a reason to carry an Apollo Twin with you, frankly, not simply because it gives you the sound of the EMT, but because it does so in such a way that’s flexible and allows lots of different creative sound capabilities.

There are three EMT plates modeled, each from The Plant Studios. The reason is simple: there are variations from hardware to hardware, by design and after aging.

You get a model of the mechanical decay controls on the original, though, which sounds different from other reverbs. High pass filters let you shape the results, with enough parameters that you aren’t just spreading the same sound on each time.

Reverb time is key. As short as half a second, you can use the EMT to create subtle thickening effects or timbral changes – it can be as much about color as reverb. And you can do that in mono, as well. That can be nice in an electronic context on everything from synths to drums.

You’ll spend a lot time shuffling the three plate models (A, B, and C), adjusting reverb time, and trying wet/dry – useful having wet solo to hear what the unit is actually doing.

It’s also worth playing with the features UA has added. There’s a handy internal EQ. Predelay, width, balance, and modulation have in some sense nothing to do with the EMT, but these parameters are hugely useful and something to which we’re accustomed now. That turns the EMT model in the UA into both a good model of the sound of the original, and an effect instrument you can use like a modern tool – an otherwise-impossible hybrid. To be fair, so, too, is a good impulse response convolution model of the plate, but the particular configuration here is really well balanced for the sound. It’s hard to go wrong.

And yes, the whole thing is endorsed by EMT Studiotechnik GmbH. Getting a stamp of approval in Germany is no small matter, so respect.

Now, this isn’t really news, this software – it came out in 2010. But that’s the funny thing about software tools. You find some simply outlast others. And while the EMT software is “vintage” 2010, it’s also benefited from improved console software and more flexible tracking on the newer Apollos.

The original demo film covers the software neatly:

DV247 is a good starter tutorial:

But the best tips are in this video from UA themselves, published in March (also proving there’s more to say about this thing a few years on). Now, I can say very confidently that you can take these same techniques and apply them to very different source material and genres:

I’m curious: who out there is also using the UAD model? Or another model of this plate (like the Audio Ease)? Impressions?

On which source material?

And anyone who’s played with the original? Of course, another upside of these digital models is, far from making you lose your interest in the original, it might just trigger your curiosity.

If you have a compatible UA system, though, right now the EMT 140 is on sale (just by coincidence as I wrote this up, as I’d entirely forgotten):

Yeah, maybe a look at the history of plates in general could be interesting!

Jenkem

Out of curiosity did you pay for your Apollo Twin and Apollo rack mount or was it provided by the company for free? See a lot of posts/adverts on CDM for Apollo but it seems well out of reach for most producers.

The Apollo has a street around $700, including plug-ins. The plug-in here is on sale for $99. That to me makes it about the best buy for an independent producer of a high-end interface, and well within reach for a lot of people.

There are two major emulations of the EMT. The other I mention here is the one in the full blown Audio Ease Altiverb which has a list of nearly a grand – so it actually costs more than the UA.

I’m not only for buying into the UAD platform. I’m curious if anyone is using other emulations of the EMT. I know I’m not alone using the one on the UAD, however.

As for budget buys, those are great, too. In the hopper are some reviews of inexpensive audio interfaces, including the Sonoma which I think has some of the best conversion of any box, and that’s around $100.

Bob

Don’t mean to be an ass – that’s a good response and all, but you didn’t answer the question. Sorry.

Space Captain

Who cares. He’s pointed out a reverb which sounds good and is useful. You can hear from demos online whether it will work for you before you pay for it, It’s his blog, not a news site.

Actually, I realized I had explained the earlier question and didn’t respond to this particular question.

Yes, I have a long-term loan of UAD’s hardware, so I didn’t buy it. Software is generally provided by all vendors to all sites for free (sometimes they’ll make expiring licenses, but that’s rare); hardware loans are actually less likely. Universal has a greater incentive to give reviewers their hardware because otherwise we can’t evaluate their software.

Now, I can tell you about hardware loans – I don’t think they’re a particularly likely form of influence. In what instance would you say, “wow, I got this thing for free, but it’s crap/overpriced – I’m going to write about this crap just so I get to keep it”?

Now, advertising, that’s another story. The reality is, if we run ad-supported sites, we’ll get these kind of complaints all the time. I believe we have an obligation to identify what’s advertising, of course (CDM does), and as far as influence, we’ll either convince people or not in our actual writing whether we have value.

Ultimately, readers are the greatest influence. We convince you, or we lose you.

The FTC rule I think is bogus. It’s targeted at “bloggers” as a separate category from journalists. I’m sure you (like me) have been sometimes looking for a review and wound up at something that wasn’t an actual review, but a sort of Google-optimized ad. But anyway, it wasn’t targeted at sites like this one. The concern was testimonials on sites that were set up for that exclusive purpose. And it’s a guideline, not a rule.

And this is a site published in Germany (which actually means it is subject to all kinds of actual laws all over the world – disclosure “guidelines” in one country or another would be impossible to follow).

just passing

> In what instance would you say, “wow, I got this thing for free, but
it’s crap/overpriced – I’m going to write about this crap just so I get
to keep it”?

Well, if it’s crap and you say otherwise, yes, you’ll be found out pretty quickly. But if you got it for free, how can you really, objectively tell if it’s overpriced? How can you truly, objectively tell whether or not you would have spent $799 on the outfit if you’d had to when you don’t? You can assert that it’s value for money, you can compare it with everything else on the market and determine that you’ve made as objective a qualification as you can, and you can really, truly believe it – but the only point at which that gets tested is the point at which they come to ask for it back and you say “no, I’m keeping it, but here’s $799 and thanks for the trial period”. That actually happens in, for example, Sound on Sound’s reviews.

Moreover, we are all the products of a society in which, for better or for worse, the size of a pricetag influences the perception of quality. All the more so when it’s a pricetag that doesn’t have to be paid. So yes, if you have an expensive item on permanent loan, I contend that you have an additional preconception of its quality for which you, or we, have to control. Not consciously – but simply as a result of having grown up in, and having had your perceptions of value and worth moulded by, Western consumerist society.

So yes – it does have an effect. It can’t not, and the effect it has is likely to be entirely subconscious. So the next most objective thing you can do, other than actually handing over money you can ill afford for everything you mention or review, is disclose whether you actually did pay for something with money, or whether your influence is what caused it to come to you. And not just when someone asks the inconvenient question (and then someone else has to repeat it) – in the actual coverage itself.

As you say, you have to convince us or lose us. Exactly how convincing do you think the perception of evasiveness over these questions is going to be?

Martin Wheeler

“That actually happens in, for example, Sound on Sound’s reviews.” That may ( or may not, I don’t know) be the case. But Sound On Sound is heavily dependent on recurrent advertising, and lots of it. About what percentage of Sound On Sound’s reviews would you call negative ? I have nothing against Sound On Sound, it exists in the same late capitalist space that we all do, but IMNSHO in Peter’s review/ hey look at this/ share the enthusiasm type articles, he in general, goes out of his way to put things in context and talk about alternatives ( Altiverb models in this case ) _way_ more than a SOS style “here’s a couple of alternatives” box. I’m all for transparency, and maybe there are situations where it would be better if some things were mentioned in the interests of “full disclosure” but suggesting that SOS is somehow influence free ( as opposed to Peter’s “perceived evasiveness”) because they give review models of hardware back !?? Come on, what do you think pays their salaries ?

just passing

I mention one publication, once, by way of providing a specific counterexample, and you proceed to respond to me as though I had made a blanket claim of superiority (“suggesting that SOS is somehow influence free” – O RLY?).

Ah, okay, but — negative and objective aren’t the same thing. And the Venom is a perfect case – I can think of a couple of reviewers who gave that thing lavish reviews, and they actually did love it (sometimes in ways I couldn’t understand).

There’s a really simple reason you see fewer negative reviews in CDM. Writing on this site, I have the luxury of skipping over stuff I really don’t like and lavishing time on the stuff I do.

I love Paul and I love SOS. And I was even recently in the position of having my own product reviewed by the publication (the MeeBlip).

I think it’s fantastic that people have opinions and personalities, because then of course you’ll naturally gravitate to the ones you want to read.

As for the industry as a whole, this is a much deeper argument. But right now I feel like there’s more an absence of independent publications than there is an overabundance of advertiser influence. I’d certainly love to hire more writers, which would do far more to correct for my own biases and angles.

just passing

> Ah, okay, but — negative and objective aren’t the same thing.

But a negative review of a freebie must be *really* heartfelt, no?

> There’s a really simple reason you see fewer negative reviews in CDM.

SOS is the outlier here, not CDM. If anything, I’d put CDM between SOS and, say, Music Radar.

Maybe a studio list page à la Legowelt with ‘on loan’ (or some such phrasing) specified would quell doubts and clarify your relationship to the equipment.

I think there is no shame working it into the body of the article too (personal purchase, evaluation unit, borrowed from friend, found in a dumpster etc) and it can add a nice background detail.

Ultimately though, I appreciate the thoughtful and reflective nature of this publication and in the grand scheme of things such details feel minor in the scope of the larger conversation about technology and music that CDM is part of.

That’s simply not a tenable argument. Every reader has a different budget, different profession, different income circumstances. I can’t use my personal case to really judge any of that.

Not to be blunt, but I can also tell you the role of “music technology journalist” sometimes means that we just aren’t earning enough money from gear to be able to afford pro gear. So I don’t doubt for a second that writers are leveraging loaner gear to make up for the fact that a lot of the hours spent reviewing that equipment isn’t as lucrative as, say, being a mixing engineer.

At the same time, I know there are readers who have tighter budgets – and dramatically tighter budgets than I do. That’s why I continue to look at budget-priced options, to talk about artists who can’t necessarily afford fancy studios, and one of the reasons why I write about (and sometimes develop) free and open source tools.

The reason you don’t see disclosures on loan terms from CDM or any other publication I’ve ever read is, again, to be bluntly honest, it’s all on loan. Sometimes a couple of weeks, sometimes much longer.

Okay, so if we can’t use buying gear to keep objective, what should we do? I think we have to do a hell of a lot of research, to try to judge equipment on its merits, to look at the price of other materials in the marketplace.

And we should listen to feedback – positive and negative.

Also, closing thought, because I think this matters more than any disclosure or policy on its own:

It’s really important for me to write every day with the assumption that I know *less* than others do, not more. Do advertisements and loans bias our writing? Hell yes. But that’s really only the beginning. I think my brain is more or less a complex network of biases and opinions. And that’s okay – even a good thing – so long as I’m willing to have those ideas challenged.

No. Not exactly. What I’m arguing is that *I can’t necessarily tell* whether you can or not. But if you’re brave enough to disclose that the gear was provided on a promotional basis from the off, then I’m more likely to assume you’re at least attempting to correct for any such bias, by putting its source upfront.

Obviously, it’d be silly to only ask people to review what they’ve bought, for reasons you allude to. But if you say “I’m buying this because otherwise I’d have to give it back in a week”, or even “I’m really glad they’ve let me have this for a year, because I couldn’t afford it and I really wish I could” – well, then I know that it’s not just good value for money in your judgement as a reviewer when compared with everything else out there. I know *you* are prepared to put *your* money on the table for it. In other words – I know you found it to be something you can’t live without, even against the breadth of the field that you get to sample and we don’t.

It’s hard to think of a more effective recommendation than that.

> That’s simply not a tenable argument

…then why tell me I was making it?

> I can also tell you the role of “music technology journalist” sometimes means that we just aren’t earning enough money from gear to be able to afford pro gear.

Not only did I not suggest otherwise, I actually made a point of mentioning that I thought this was the case.

> The reason you don’t see disclosures on loan terms from CDM or any other publication I’ve ever read is, again, to be bluntly honest, it’s all on loan.

I didn’t know that was an assumption I could make. Now I do.

> Do advertisements and loans bias our writing? Hell yes.

OK. You actually seem to be taking a firmer stance on this than I was; I was just saying “it’s impossible to rule out the possibility”…

> But that’s really only the beginning. I think my brain is more or less a complex network of biases and opinions. And that’s okay – even a good thing – so long as I’m willing to have those ideas challenged.

Agreed (true for me, for you, for everyone). The only thing that works against that is openness, and accepting the possibility of being inadvertently wrong.

F S

Thanks for the clarification. I’d be happy to see a (short!) disclosure like this below every article in the future.

Bob

I guess this is what it is. I didn’t occur to me that this is a quasi (or fully) pay-per-post style blog entry… but the more I think about it, it is clearly that. However, you have gone above and beyond a simple product review; you write very well, and actually talking about the original EMT has made it interesting, and the “science” behind it etc – that style and depth is what makes this an engaging site. It’s natural that companies would approach you to spruik their products, and in this case you’ve done it so deftly that it almost passed without notice. Truth be told though, what was your motivation for writing this? Be honest. I think I know the answer…

You said yourself that this product is not new. It’s a good five years old. What’s different about it right now? Simple… it’s on sale… and that means that UA want to advertise that it’s on sale, and advertising in the age of new media can take new, subtle forms… including posts like this on reputable and well-regarded industry blogs.

If you continue to write posts about innovations in music technology, I’m all for that. To defend this as anything other than what it clearly is, well… that’s disappointing. Time to man up and take it on the chin.

PaulDavisTheFirst

Suppose just a moment that Peter had no relationship with UAD at all. Suppose that the plugin was on sale.

Do you think that it would be inappropriate for CDM to mention this?

If not, how do you think Peter should have mentioned it? Specifically, how would what he should write differ from what he did write?

Jaybeeg

Peter is in a tricky role. Companies want him to write about their stuff, and they expect him to write good things. Remember what he said about the half baked Akai Rhythm Wolf? I haven’t seen an Akai banner ad on the site since then, and it sure looks like they’re punishing him for simply being honest about their shoddy effort.

Akai bought a front page full of banner ads on Synthtopia though, simply because that site just runs company press releases and short product blurbs; they don’t actually test (or even seem to use) the gear they mention. That’s not fair at all.

I’d prefer to read Peter’s pre-release reviews of new Teenage Engineering gear, KORG synths and whatever else he can get his hands on.

lala

I don’t use UAD or audioease stuff but I found some nice free impulse responses from EMTs, I think they are nice on drums, no need to do the Elvis thing with it …

Jenkem

Out of curiosity did you pay for your Apollo Twin and Apollo rack mount or was it provided by the company for free? See a lot of posts/adverts on CDM for Apollo but it seems well out of reach for most producers.

The Apollo has a street around $700, including plug-ins. The plug-in here is on sale for $99. That to me makes it about the best buy for an independent producer of a high-end interface, and well within reach for a lot of people.

There are two major emulations of the EMT. The other I mention here is the one in the full blown Audio Ease Altiverb which has a list of nearly a grand – so it actually costs more than the UA.

I’m not only for buying into the UAD platform. I’m curious if anyone is using other emulations of the EMT. I know I’m not alone using the one on the UAD, however.

As for budget buys, those are great, too. In the hopper are some reviews of inexpensive audio interfaces, including the Sonoma which I think has some of the best conversion of any box, and that’s around $100.

Bob

Don’t mean to be an ass – that’s a good response and all, but you didn’t answer the question. Sorry.

Space Captain

Who cares. He’s pointed out a reverb which sounds good and is useful. You can hear from demos online whether it will work for you before you pay for it, It’s his blog, not a news site.

Actually, I realized I had explained the earlier question and didn’t respond to this particular question.

Yes, I have a long-term loan of UAD’s hardware, so I didn’t buy it. Software is generally provided by all vendors to all sites for free (sometimes they’ll make expiring licenses, but that’s rare); hardware loans are actually less likely. Universal has a greater incentive to give reviewers their hardware because otherwise we can’t evaluate their software.

Now, I can tell you about hardware loans – I don’t think they’re a particularly likely form of influence. In what instance would you say, “wow, I got this thing for free, but it’s crap/overpriced – I’m going to write about this crap just so I get to keep it”?

Now, advertising, that’s another story. The reality is, if we run ad-supported sites, we’ll get these kind of complaints all the time. I believe we have an obligation to identify what’s advertising, of course (CDM does), and as far as influence, we’ll either convince people or not in our actual writing whether we have value.

Ultimately, readers are the greatest influence. We convince you, or we lose you.

The FTC rule I think is bogus. It’s targeted at “bloggers” as a separate category from journalists. I’m sure you (like me) have been sometimes looking for a review and wound up at something that wasn’t an actual review, but a sort of Google-optimized ad. But anyway, it wasn’t targeted at sites like this one. The concern was testimonials on sites that were set up for that exclusive purpose. And it’s a guideline, not a rule.

And this is a site published in Germany (which actually means it is subject to all kinds of actual laws all over the world – disclosure “guidelines” in one country or another would be impossible to follow).

F S

Thanks for the clarification. I’d be happy to see a (short!) disclosure like this below every article in the future.

Bob

I guess this is what it is. I didn’t occur to me that this is a quasi (or fully) pay-per-post style blog entry… but the more I think about it, it is clearly that. However, you have gone above and beyond a simple product review; you write very well, and actually talking about the original EMT has made it interesting, and the “science” behind it etc – that style and depth is what makes this an engaging site. It’s natural that companies would approach you to spruik their products, and in this case you’ve done it so deftly that it almost passed without notice. Truth be told though, what was your motivation for writing this? Be honest. I think I know the answer…

You said yourself that this product is not new. It’s a good five years old. What’s different about it right now? Simple… it’s on sale… and that means that UA want to advertise that it’s on sale, and advertising in the age of new media can take new, subtle forms… including posts like this on reputable and well-regarded industry blogs.

If you continue to write posts about innovations in music technology, I’m all for that. To defend this as anything other than what it clearly is, well… that’s disappointing. Time to man up and take it on the chin.

PaulDavisTheFirst

Suppose just a moment that Peter had no relationship with UAD at all. Suppose that the plugin was on sale.

Do you think that it would be inappropriate for CDM to mention this?

If not, how do you think Peter should have mentioned it? Specifically, how would what he should write differ from what he did write?

Jaybeeg

Peter is in a tricky role. Companies want him to write about their stuff, and they expect him to write good things. Remember what he said about the half baked Akai Rhythm Wolf? I haven’t seen an Akai banner ad on the site since then, and it sure looks like they’re punishing him for simply being honest about their shoddy effort.

Akai bought a front page full of banner ads on Synthtopia though, simply because that site just runs company press releases and short product blurbs; they don’t actually test (or even seem to use) the gear they mention. That’s not fair at all.

I’d prefer to read Peter’s pre-release reviews of new Teenage Engineering gear, KORG synths and whatever else he can get his hands on.

And, c’mon. Manufacturers loan their gear to magazines all the time. Why would you call out a website for the same thing? (more to the point: how can someone review something if they don’t actually have it on hand to review?)

lala

I don’t use UAD or audioease stuff but I found some nice free impulse responses from EMTs, I think they are nice on drums, no need to do the Elvis thing with it …

Jenkem

Out of curiosity did you pay for your Apollo Twin and Apollo rack mount or was it provided by the company for free? See a lot of posts/adverts on CDM for Apollo but it seems well out of reach for most producers.

The Apollo has a street around $700, including plug-ins. The plug-in here is on sale for $99. That to me makes it about the best buy for an independent producer of a high-end interface, and well within reach for a lot of people.

There are two major emulations of the EMT. The other I mention here is the one in the full blown Audio Ease Altiverb which has a list of nearly a grand – so it actually costs more than the UA.

I’m not only for buying into the UAD platform. I’m curious if anyone is using other emulations of the EMT. I know I’m not alone using the one on the UAD, however.

As for budget buys, those are great, too. In the hopper are some reviews of inexpensive audio interfaces, including the Sonoma which I think has some of the best conversion of any box, and that’s around $100.

Bob

Don’t mean to be an ass – that’s a good response and all, but you didn’t answer the question. Sorry.

Space Captain

Who cares. He’s pointed out a reverb which sounds good and is useful. You can hear from demos online whether it will work for you before you pay for it, It’s his blog, not a news site.

Actually, I realized I had explained the earlier question and didn’t respond to this particular question.

Yes, I have a long-term loan of UAD’s hardware, so I didn’t buy it. Software is generally provided by all vendors to all sites for free (sometimes they’ll make expiring licenses, but that’s rare); hardware loans are actually less likely. Universal has a greater incentive to give reviewers their hardware because otherwise we can’t evaluate their software.

Now, I can tell you about hardware loans – I don’t think they’re a particularly likely form of influence. In what instance would you say, “wow, I got this thing for free, but it’s crap/overpriced – I’m going to write about this crap just so I get to keep it”?

Now, advertising, that’s another story. The reality is, if we run ad-supported sites, we’ll get these kind of complaints all the time. I believe we have an obligation to identify what’s advertising, of course (CDM does), and as far as influence, we’ll either convince people or not in our actual writing whether we have value.

Ultimately, readers are the greatest influence. We convince you, or we lose you.

The FTC rule I think is bogus. It’s targeted at “bloggers” as a separate category from journalists. I’m sure you (like me) have been sometimes looking for a review and wound up at something that wasn’t an actual review, but a sort of Google-optimized ad. But anyway, it wasn’t targeted at sites like this one. The concern was testimonials on sites that were set up for that exclusive purpose. And it’s a guideline, not a rule.

And this is a site published in Germany (which actually means it is subject to all kinds of actual laws all over the world – disclosure “guidelines” in one country or another would be impossible to follow).

F S

Thanks for the clarification. I’d be happy to see a (short!) disclosure like this below every article in the future.

Bob

I guess this is what it is. I didn’t occur to me that this is a quasi (or fully) pay-per-post style blog entry… but the more I think about it, it is clearly that. However, you have gone above and beyond a simple product review; you write very well, and actually talking about the original EMT has made it interesting, and the “science” behind it etc – that style and depth is what makes this an engaging site. It’s natural that companies would approach you to spruik their products, and in this case you’ve done it so deftly that it almost passed without notice. Truth be told though, what was your motivation for writing this? Be honest. I think I know the answer…

You said yourself that this product is not new. It’s a good five years old. What’s different about it right now? Simple… it’s on sale… and that means that UA want to advertise that it’s on sale, and advertising in the age of new media can take new, subtle forms… including posts like this on reputable and well-regarded industry blogs.

If you continue to write posts about innovations in music technology, I’m all for that. To defend this as anything other than what it clearly is, well… that’s disappointing. Time to man up and take it on the chin.

PaulDavisTheFirst

Suppose just a moment that Peter had no relationship with UAD at all. Suppose that the plugin was on sale.

Do you think that it would be inappropriate for CDM to mention this?

If not, how do you think Peter should have mentioned it? Specifically, how would what he should write differ from what he did write?

Jaybeeg

Peter is in a tricky role. Companies want him to write about their stuff, and they expect him to write good things. Remember what he said about the half baked Akai Rhythm Wolf? I haven’t seen an Akai banner ad on the site since then, and it sure looks like they’re punishing him for simply being honest about their shoddy effort.

Akai bought a front page full of banner ads on Synthtopia though, simply because that site just runs company press releases and short product blurbs; they don’t actually test (or even seem to use) the gear they mention. That’s not fair at all.

I’d prefer to read Peter’s pre-release reviews of new Teenage Engineering gear, KORG synths and whatever else he can get his hands on.

And, c’mon. Manufacturers loan their gear to magazines all the time. Why would you call out a website for the same thing? (more to the point: how can someone review something if they don’t actually have it on hand to review?)

lala

I don’t use UAD or audioease stuff but I found some nice free impulse responses from EMTs, I think they are nice on drums, no need to do the Elvis thing with it …

Blake

I use the Audio Ease EMT Plate a lot on vocals – very “natural” sounding reverb. I produced an album for a major New Orleans singer, and the New Orleans aesthetic frowns on added reverb. The EMT added richness to vocals without sounding like clichéd vocal reverb. Highly recommended.

Blake

I use the Audio Ease EMT Plate a lot on vocals – very “natural” sounding reverb. I produced an album for a major New Orleans singer, and the New Orleans aesthetic frowns on added reverb. The EMT added richness to vocals without sounding like clichéd vocal reverb. Highly recommended.

Blake

I use the Audio Ease EMT Plate a lot on vocals – very “natural” sounding reverb. I produced an album for a major New Orleans singer, and the New Orleans aesthetic frowns on added reverb. The EMT added richness to vocals without sounding like clichéd vocal reverb. Highly recommended.

These days I use the UAD RMX16 on vocals and the EMT 140 on everything else, guitars, drums, percussion. I’m partial to the “C” model. I’ve worked in a couple studios with the real thing and I feel like there was a nice thickness to the sound that the plug-in doesn’t quite capture. Still sounds great though.

These days I use the UAD RMX16 on vocals and the EMT 140 on everything else, guitars, drums, percussion. I’m partial to the “C” model. I’ve worked in a couple studios with the real thing and I feel like there was a nice thickness to the sound that the plug-in doesn’t quite capture. Still sounds great though.

These days I use the UAD RMX16 on vocals and the EMT 140 on everything else, guitars, drums, percussion. I’m partial to the “C” model. I’ve worked in a couple studios with the real thing and I feel like there was a nice thickness to the sound that the plug-in doesn’t quite capture. Still sounds great though.

bc3

The EMT 140 has been on my AUX 1 channel since I purchased the Apollo 2 years ago. I do have other UA reverbs, but to my ears it is the most “natural” sounding and IMO is the best for vocals.

bc3

The EMT 140 has been on my AUX 1 channel since I purchased the Apollo 2 years ago. I do have other UA reverbs, but to my ears it is the most “natural” sounding and IMO is the best for vocals.

bc3

The EMT 140 has been on my AUX 1 channel since I purchased the Apollo 2 years ago. I do have other UA reverbs, but to my ears it is the most “natural” sounding and IMO is the best for vocals.

Password?

I don’t know how he got his hands on it but I have a friend that owns an EMT 140. It’s a monster but the sound is amazing. If the plugin sounds half as good as the real thing (and to be clear, I love plugins too so I’m sure this thing is fantastic) then it will have a home in my collection as soon as I can find the scratch for it.

Yeah, seems there are some EMTs around Berlin. I think the next report should be on the real thing. (EMT GmbH are not a CDM sponsor. 😉 )

Password?

I don’t know how he got his hands on it but I have a friend that owns an EMT 140. It’s a monster but the sound is amazing. If the plugin sounds half as good as the real thing (and to be clear, I love plugins too so I’m sure this thing is fantastic) then it will have a home in my collection as soon as I can find the scratch for it.

Yeah, seems there are some EMTs around Berlin. I think the next report should be on the real thing. (EMT GmbH are not a CDM sponsor. 😉 )

Password?

I don’t know how he got his hands on it but I have a friend that owns an EMT 140. It’s a monster but the sound is amazing. If the plugin sounds half as good as the real thing (and to be clear, I love plugins too so I’m sure this thing is fantastic) then it will have a home in my collection as soon as I can find the scratch for it.

I built a plate 3 months ago, 3′ x 5’9″ cold rolled sheet…large, but not as large as a 140. Very cool sounds coming out of it. I also have the UAD version (which is amazing especially for its convenience; I live in an apartment and the only place I can house the plate is my kitchen…no pun intended) which was part of my original inspiration to build.

gunboat_d

they are easy to build, but yeah, hard to store and once you set it down, you’re loathe to pick it up again.
when you picked up your CR sheet, did you walk around the shop banging on sheets with a tiny hammer listening for ‘sizzle’?
i’d like to build my own and I have room to store one, but the widely held belief (myth?) is that the EMT sheets just sound musical when banged on. So just not any sheet of steel will do. it sounds like hokum, but steel isn’t cheap so i’m wary.
what gauge did you buy?

28 gauge. I got an incredible deal on it, so I wasn’t going to look a gift horse in the mouth by asking to suspend and ping the sheets wasting their time (I got it from a very large warehouse that typically deals in much larger volume than one person buying one sheet). From the research I did, albeit limited, I thought the sound would depend more on the type of steel and consistency in tension across the sheet itself so I focused on that. To me, with some EQ and compression it sounds damn near spot on the UAD plugin, just much less control..

If you have the tools, a couple hundred bucks, and the time, it is well worth it IMO.

gunboat_d

wow, that’s thinner than I expected. i’ll have to head up to the strip/sheet guys and see what they have.

I built a plate 3 months ago, 3′ x 5’9″ cold rolled sheet…large, but not as large as a 140. Very cool sounds coming out of it. I also have the UAD version (which is amazing especially for its convenience; I live in an apartment and the only place I can house the plate is my kitchen…no pun intended) which was part of my original inspiration to build.

gunboat_d

they are easy to build, but yeah, hard to store and once you set it down, you’re loathe to pick it up again.
when you picked up your CR sheet, did you walk around the shop banging on sheets with a tiny hammer listening for ‘sizzle’?
i’d like to build my own and I have room to store one, but the widely held belief (myth?) is that the EMT sheets just sound musical when banged on. So just not any sheet of steel will do. it sounds like hokum, but steel isn’t cheap so i’m wary.
what gauge did you buy?

28 gauge. I got an incredible deal on it, so I wasn’t going to look a gift horse in the mouth by asking to suspend and ping the sheets wasting their time (I got it from a very large warehouse that typically deals in much larger volume than one person buying one sheet). From the research I did, albeit limited, I thought the sound would depend more on the type of steel and consistency in tension across the sheet itself so I focused on that. To me, with some EQ and compression it sounds damn near spot on the UAD plugin, just much less control..

If you have the tools, a couple hundred bucks, and the time, it is well worth it IMO.

gunboat_d

wow, that’s thinner than I expected. i’ll have to head up to the strip/sheet guys and see what they have.

I built a plate 3 months ago, 3′ x 5’9″ cold rolled sheet…large, but not as large as a 140. Very cool sounds coming out of it. I also have the UAD version (which is amazing especially for its convenience; I live in an apartment and the only place I can house the plate is my kitchen…no pun intended) which was part of my original inspiration to build.

gunboat_d

they are easy to build, but yeah, hard to store and once you set it down, you’re loathe to pick it up again.
when you picked up your CR sheet, did you walk around the shop banging on sheets with a tiny hammer listening for ‘sizzle’?
i’d like to build my own and I have room to store one, but the widely held belief (myth?) is that the EMT sheets just sound musical when banged on. So just not any sheet of steel will do. it sounds like hokum, but steel isn’t cheap so i’m wary.
what gauge did you buy?

28 gauge. I got an incredible deal on it, so I wasn’t going to look a gift horse in the mouth by asking to suspend and ping the sheets wasting their time (I got it from a very large warehouse that typically deals in much larger volume than one person buying one sheet). From the research I did, albeit limited, I thought the sound would depend more on the type of steel and consistency in tension across the sheet itself so I focused on that. To me, with some EQ and compression it sounds damn near spot on the UAD plugin, just much less control..

If you have the tools, a couple hundred bucks, and the time, it is well worth it IMO.

gunboat_d

wow, that’s thinner than I expected. i’ll have to head up to the strip/sheet guys and see what they have.

praveensharma

Damn you peter. I now have hundreds of dollars in plugins in my shopping cart just staring me in the face… UAD wins. Also – my purchase of an Apollo has changed my life – highly recommend it if you can afford the plugins as well.

praveensharma

Damn you peter. I now have hundreds of dollars in plugins in my shopping cart just staring me in the face… UAD wins. Also – my purchase of an Apollo has changed my life – highly recommend it if you can afford the plugins as well.

praveensharma

Damn you peter. I now have hundreds of dollars in plugins in my shopping cart just staring me in the face… UAD wins. Also – my purchase of an Apollo has changed my life – highly recommend it if you can afford the plugins as well.

And another cool thing about Ms. Lazar is her name does sound nice if said by Dr. Evil.

Graham Spice

I switched all my verbs to the Lexicon 224 when it was released by UAD. It is really fantastic and has made my mixes better. I should go back and try the UAD plate verbs again, though. Thanks for the reminder!

Graham Spice

I switched all my verbs to the Lexicon 224 when it was released by UAD. It is really fantastic and has made my mixes better. I should go back and try the UAD plate verbs again, though. Thanks for the reminder!

Graham Spice

I switched all my verbs to the Lexicon 224 when it was released by UAD. It is really fantastic and has made my mixes better. I should go back and try the UAD plate verbs again, though. Thanks for the reminder!